What do you think?
Rate this book
A summer in the twenties
Tom Hanky, an aristocratic young man, encounters the dangerous world of labor disputes and the slums of Hull, England, when he becomes a volunteer train-driver during the 1926 general strike
254 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1981
6 people are currently reading
291 people want to read
About the author
Peter Dickinson
126 books156 followersPeter Dickinson was an English author and poet widely respected for his children's fiction, detective novels, and imaginative speculative writing. Raised partly in southern Africa before continuing his education in England, he developed an early fascination with adventure stories and classic literature, influences that later shaped his narrative style. He attended Eton College and later studied at King's College, Cambridge, before beginning a long association with the magazine Punch, where he worked for many years as assistant editor, reviewer, and resident poet. Dickinson eventually left journalism to pursue writing full time, publishing works for both adult and younger audiences. His crime novels featuring detective James Pibble earned critical praise, while his fiction for children established him as one of Britain's most distinguished authors in the field. Over the course of his career he produced nearly fifty books that combined historical imagination, fantasy, and thoughtful reflections on human behavior. He achieved rare distinction by winning the Carnegie Medal twice, for Tulku and City of Gold, recognition that placed him among the most celebrated children's writers in Britain. Dickinson also received numerous other literary honors and was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature. In addition to fiction, he wrote poetry and essays, and his work continued to influence generations of readers and writers in the field of children's literature.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
June 9, 2014
This is so well written, so atmospheric in the telling and the characters and attitudes, that I had to keep reminding myself it was not a period piece, but had been written by a master of style in the late 1970s. For all his subtle and elegant mysteries, I'd never read straight fiction by Dickinson. What a treat.
As to 'the Twenties' in the title, it's not only the (in)famous British General Strike of 1926, but the twenties of many of the participants - especially in this story. It's mainly about the upper-class Oxbridge sons and one daughter of the landed gentry, fighting for their wealth against the Commies (all labor are Commies, didn't you know that?), by volunteering to drive the trains and buses and keep British Business going. Similar experiences occur on the strikers' side, led by the mysterious "Ricardo" and the activist-orator "Red Kate Barnes". They are determined to bring the nation's transport to a halt in efforts to resist the lengthening of the workers' week and a simultaneous cut in their wages.
The learning curve is different for each of these characters, some bearing guns and others their minds.Though no one becomes anything radically different from their upbringing, the processes and degrees of those learning curves form a subtly-told tale of risk, danger and betrayals.
There is a lovely hijacking plot of a food delivery being kept by the government and business leaders as a carrot to bring the strikers into line told in incredibly fine prose, which increases the tension more than any bash-em-up telling could. In fact there are several wonderful set pieces. They all come together.
And the writing is exquisite. There is no other word. Mr. Dickinson is a past master. I've never been less than enthralled by his books.
As to 'the Twenties' in the title, it's not only the (in)famous British General Strike of 1926, but the twenties of many of the participants - especially in this story. It's mainly about the upper-class Oxbridge sons and one daughter of the landed gentry, fighting for their wealth against the Commies (all labor are Commies, didn't you know that?), by volunteering to drive the trains and buses and keep British Business going. Similar experiences occur on the strikers' side, led by the mysterious "Ricardo" and the activist-orator "Red Kate Barnes". They are determined to bring the nation's transport to a halt in efforts to resist the lengthening of the workers' week and a simultaneous cut in their wages.
The learning curve is different for each of these characters, some bearing guns and others their minds.Though no one becomes anything radically different from their upbringing, the processes and degrees of those learning curves form a subtly-told tale of risk, danger and betrayals.
There is a lovely hijacking plot of a food delivery being kept by the government and business leaders as a carrot to bring the strikers into line told in incredibly fine prose, which increases the tension more than any bash-em-up telling could. In fact there are several wonderful set pieces. They all come together.
And the writing is exquisite. There is no other word. Mr. Dickinson is a past master. I've never been less than enthralled by his books.
October 11, 2010
I just can't get into this.
October 20, 2012
Beautiful young things, romance, labor unrest, train driving, and fascist conspiracy -- oh, my!
November 12, 2023
[warning, spoilers]
“A Summer in the Twenties” is probably Dickinson’s most overtly political work, which turns out not to be a great thing. It’s not that I find his politics to be offensive: on the evidence of this book, at the time of writing he had a moderate left outlook not dissimilar to that of the British Liberal Party of the same period, firmly anti-Bolshevik but nonetheless feeling that the necessary class compromise had to take workers' interests strongly into account. Thus, our hero, Tom, finds himself caught in between a sort of proto-fascist militia and Communist agitation on the docks (of Hull), and must try to find his way towards welfare-state social democracy. Tom is from the upper classes, a student at Oxford whose first real taste of politics comes when he helps to break the General Strike of 1926 by driving a train. (It seems a bit strange to modern readers used to tales of left-wing students, but Oxford, dominated by scions of the upper classes like Tom, is a hotbed of reaction.) When the train is ambushed by striking railwaymen, Tom offers to resolve the conflict by fighting a boxing match with one of them: this old-fashioned chivalrous approach seems to him to be far superior to the method of the militia — led by a fellow student — who show up with guns and chase the unarmed strikers away, even though the militia are supposedly on his side. Nonetheless, when the militia leader recruits him to try to infiltrate the Communist cell on the Hull docks — it doesn’t entirely make sense why, except that the proto-fascists are also from the English upper classes, and so are used to recruiting fellow members of their class for tasks that they have no training for — he agrees to try to do so. Somewhat to his surprise, he succeeds, and quickly discovers that the workers are sympathetic and their grievances are legitimate: he even falls half in love with the working-class Communist agitator Kate, even though he’s already engaged to someone from his own class (hard to blame him here, as Kate is easily the most dynamic character in the whole book). However, the leader of the Communist cell, whom Tom is here to find, remains elusive, and while Tom is still investigating the dock workers go on strike against a cut in their wages. As the situation gets uglier, Tom feels that he has to do something to avoid the creation of a class struggle, something which both sides seem to be promoting. This involves unmasking the bad guy, though unfortunately for the reader, he turns out to be mainly a plot contrivance. He comes, of course, from the lower middle classes, not the workers, and his actions are motivated by a frustrated desire to move up socially, as distinct from the workers who would be content with their lot if they could get a fair deal: plus, in a rather transparent bit of horseshoe theory nonsense, he turns out to also be a trusted informer for the proto-fascists. Tom also decides to steal several train cars of food that are being dangled as an inducement for the ever-hungrier workers to break the strike: this gesture, coming from two members of the upper classes — Tom and the Canon who is married to the dock owner, this last relationship being what prevents this from really being stealing — will supposedly show that there isn’t really a conflict between the classes, thus inoculating the workers against the dangers of Bolshevism. This task accomplished against the opposition of the militia, the book ends with an epilogue in which Tom is in France with his new wife, who is of course not Kate, having learned valuable lessons and become a deeper, better person thanks to this experience.
Amazingly, Dickinson, who is generally quite sharp, doesn’t seem to see how totally inadequate this is as a defense of his ideology. He doesn’t even bother to tell us what happened with the dock-workers strike! It’s not at all difficult to envision the provision of some extra supplies extending the strike but not changing the final outcome one whit. Conversely, it’s quite difficult to see why this one-off gesture is supposed to totally change the dockers’ view of their class enemies. They can think that Tom is a nice guy and appreciate what he tried to do for them without losing sight of the fact that the bosses are actively trying to screw them over: Tom’s inability to change that is, if anything, further proof that the class struggle is far bigger than one person. There’s also a strong whiff of paternalism here, something that it is again surprising that Dickinson, generally an acute observer of the English class system, seems to have missed. It’s hard to avoid noticing that Tom freely substitutes his own judgments for those of the workers: they may think that what they need is a strong union and better wages, but Tom, and Dickinson, knows that these things are not really important, which is why both are happy to leave Hull before the conflict is resolved one way or the other. Of course, it’s not that likely that Tom could have a meaningful impact on the outcome of the strike, much less on the long-term course of labor relations in Hull, within the bounds of this book, but that’s also part of the paternalism: the story is Tom’s story, not that of the dockers of Hull. Their function is simply to help mold Tom, to provide a useful object lesson. It’s possible to imagine Tom opting to stay in Hull and dedicating himself to the dockworkers’ struggle: this could even be regarded as a continuation of the project of fending off the dangers of Communism. But such a thing is never even considered, because what’s really at stake here has nothing to do with the workers, not even the possibility that they might succumb to the Red temptation. Instead, it’s Tom’s political formation that matters, as he must come to understand the workers’ struggle as part of his training for eventual leadership along the enlightened lines that Dickinson favors. And the reason that Tom is the future leader, and not any of the workers, is clear: he was born into the ruling class, while they were born into the laboring class. The idea that this might not be a sufficient reason is never even considered.
So as an advertisement for a Beveridge-esque liberalism — itself not the worst thing in the world, to be sure, but it was already proving inadequate when this book was written and the subsequent years have not been kind — “A Summer in the Twenties” is largely a failure. But as a book it’s not bad, especially if you really love steam trains, as there are a couple of extended scenes about driving them. The weakest part of the book is the lead Communist agitator, who is clearly an ideological contrivance, but Dickinson recognizes that and keeps him in the background. Instead, we get a lot of Kate, who, since she doesn’t bear the burden of Dickinson’s political argument, is far more interesting. The proto-fascist leader exudes a subtle but definite menace, and the scenes among the workers of Hull feel surprisingly genuine. And though the plot doesn’t make much sense, Dickinson is quite good at generating suspense regardless. Plus, the real disappointment doesn’t kick in until the end, when you realize that Dickinson thinks that this is all that he needs. I wouldn’t necessarily recommend "A Summer in the Twenties", but if you’re a Dickinson fan working your way through the oeuvre, there’s no need to skip it.
“A Summer in the Twenties” is probably Dickinson’s most overtly political work, which turns out not to be a great thing. It’s not that I find his politics to be offensive: on the evidence of this book, at the time of writing he had a moderate left outlook not dissimilar to that of the British Liberal Party of the same period, firmly anti-Bolshevik but nonetheless feeling that the necessary class compromise had to take workers' interests strongly into account. Thus, our hero, Tom, finds himself caught in between a sort of proto-fascist militia and Communist agitation on the docks (of Hull), and must try to find his way towards welfare-state social democracy. Tom is from the upper classes, a student at Oxford whose first real taste of politics comes when he helps to break the General Strike of 1926 by driving a train. (It seems a bit strange to modern readers used to tales of left-wing students, but Oxford, dominated by scions of the upper classes like Tom, is a hotbed of reaction.) When the train is ambushed by striking railwaymen, Tom offers to resolve the conflict by fighting a boxing match with one of them: this old-fashioned chivalrous approach seems to him to be far superior to the method of the militia — led by a fellow student — who show up with guns and chase the unarmed strikers away, even though the militia are supposedly on his side. Nonetheless, when the militia leader recruits him to try to infiltrate the Communist cell on the Hull docks — it doesn’t entirely make sense why, except that the proto-fascists are also from the English upper classes, and so are used to recruiting fellow members of their class for tasks that they have no training for — he agrees to try to do so. Somewhat to his surprise, he succeeds, and quickly discovers that the workers are sympathetic and their grievances are legitimate: he even falls half in love with the working-class Communist agitator Kate, even though he’s already engaged to someone from his own class (hard to blame him here, as Kate is easily the most dynamic character in the whole book). However, the leader of the Communist cell, whom Tom is here to find, remains elusive, and while Tom is still investigating the dock workers go on strike against a cut in their wages. As the situation gets uglier, Tom feels that he has to do something to avoid the creation of a class struggle, something which both sides seem to be promoting. This involves unmasking the bad guy, though unfortunately for the reader, he turns out to be mainly a plot contrivance. He comes, of course, from the lower middle classes, not the workers, and his actions are motivated by a frustrated desire to move up socially, as distinct from the workers who would be content with their lot if they could get a fair deal: plus, in a rather transparent bit of horseshoe theory nonsense, he turns out to also be a trusted informer for the proto-fascists. Tom also decides to steal several train cars of food that are being dangled as an inducement for the ever-hungrier workers to break the strike: this gesture, coming from two members of the upper classes — Tom and the Canon who is married to the dock owner, this last relationship being what prevents this from really being stealing — will supposedly show that there isn’t really a conflict between the classes, thus inoculating the workers against the dangers of Bolshevism. This task accomplished against the opposition of the militia, the book ends with an epilogue in which Tom is in France with his new wife, who is of course not Kate, having learned valuable lessons and become a deeper, better person thanks to this experience.
Amazingly, Dickinson, who is generally quite sharp, doesn’t seem to see how totally inadequate this is as a defense of his ideology. He doesn’t even bother to tell us what happened with the dock-workers strike! It’s not at all difficult to envision the provision of some extra supplies extending the strike but not changing the final outcome one whit. Conversely, it’s quite difficult to see why this one-off gesture is supposed to totally change the dockers’ view of their class enemies. They can think that Tom is a nice guy and appreciate what he tried to do for them without losing sight of the fact that the bosses are actively trying to screw them over: Tom’s inability to change that is, if anything, further proof that the class struggle is far bigger than one person. There’s also a strong whiff of paternalism here, something that it is again surprising that Dickinson, generally an acute observer of the English class system, seems to have missed. It’s hard to avoid noticing that Tom freely substitutes his own judgments for those of the workers: they may think that what they need is a strong union and better wages, but Tom, and Dickinson, knows that these things are not really important, which is why both are happy to leave Hull before the conflict is resolved one way or the other. Of course, it’s not that likely that Tom could have a meaningful impact on the outcome of the strike, much less on the long-term course of labor relations in Hull, within the bounds of this book, but that’s also part of the paternalism: the story is Tom’s story, not that of the dockers of Hull. Their function is simply to help mold Tom, to provide a useful object lesson. It’s possible to imagine Tom opting to stay in Hull and dedicating himself to the dockworkers’ struggle: this could even be regarded as a continuation of the project of fending off the dangers of Communism. But such a thing is never even considered, because what’s really at stake here has nothing to do with the workers, not even the possibility that they might succumb to the Red temptation. Instead, it’s Tom’s political formation that matters, as he must come to understand the workers’ struggle as part of his training for eventual leadership along the enlightened lines that Dickinson favors. And the reason that Tom is the future leader, and not any of the workers, is clear: he was born into the ruling class, while they were born into the laboring class. The idea that this might not be a sufficient reason is never even considered.
So as an advertisement for a Beveridge-esque liberalism — itself not the worst thing in the world, to be sure, but it was already proving inadequate when this book was written and the subsequent years have not been kind — “A Summer in the Twenties” is largely a failure. But as a book it’s not bad, especially if you really love steam trains, as there are a couple of extended scenes about driving them. The weakest part of the book is the lead Communist agitator, who is clearly an ideological contrivance, but Dickinson recognizes that and keeps him in the background. Instead, we get a lot of Kate, who, since she doesn’t bear the burden of Dickinson’s political argument, is far more interesting. The proto-fascist leader exudes a subtle but definite menace, and the scenes among the workers of Hull feel surprisingly genuine. And though the plot doesn’t make much sense, Dickinson is quite good at generating suspense regardless. Plus, the real disappointment doesn’t kick in until the end, when you realize that Dickinson thinks that this is all that he needs. I wouldn’t necessarily recommend "A Summer in the Twenties", but if you’re a Dickinson fan working your way through the oeuvre, there’s no need to skip it.
August 8, 2018
A Summer in the Twenties (1981) by Peter Dickinson is specifically about the summer of 1926 (and the lead-up to it). Tom Hankey's father has his fingers on the pulse of the business world and related fields and knows that the General Strike is looming for the summer. General Hankey calls Tom back from a holiday (where Tom has fallen hard for the headstrong heiress Judy) because he wants his son to learn to drive a train so he can help keep the coal moving. He tells Tom:
I've got a bit of sympathy for the miners and not much for the owners--after all, I know quite a pack of them--but if we let the unions close the country down and keep it closed for a month, we're done for.
Tom is willing to do his bit--after all, it will give him a chance to prove himself since he was just too young for the Great War. He gets more than he bargained for....he winds up involved with Bolsheviks and dockworkers and vigilantes. He takes part in workers' meetings; he starts reading Marx; he is arrested in a police raid (nobly winning the release of unfairly arrested workers); and, though convinced that there is indeed a real Bolshevik menace in Hull, he becomes fond of his new worker friends. . . and more than fond of leading agitator. There is an air of mystery to this seemingly straight-forward bit of fiction. Someone is playing dirty in the ranks and Tom's sense of honor forces him to unearth the one who is playing both sides off of one another and nearly gets himself shot for his trouble.
This is a splendidly atmospheric historical story--a grand mix of adventure, romance, and a political dilemma. It's strewn with eccentric characters and a bit of comedy and it gives a good look at the gentry learning how the working class lives. Some of the train bits run a bit long, but overall an interesting story about the period between the world wars.
First posted on my blog My Reader's Block. Please request permission before reporting. Thanks.
I've got a bit of sympathy for the miners and not much for the owners--after all, I know quite a pack of them--but if we let the unions close the country down and keep it closed for a month, we're done for.
Tom is willing to do his bit--after all, it will give him a chance to prove himself since he was just too young for the Great War. He gets more than he bargained for....he winds up involved with Bolsheviks and dockworkers and vigilantes. He takes part in workers' meetings; he starts reading Marx; he is arrested in a police raid (nobly winning the release of unfairly arrested workers); and, though convinced that there is indeed a real Bolshevik menace in Hull, he becomes fond of his new worker friends. . . and more than fond of leading agitator. There is an air of mystery to this seemingly straight-forward bit of fiction. Someone is playing dirty in the ranks and Tom's sense of honor forces him to unearth the one who is playing both sides off of one another and nearly gets himself shot for his trouble.
This is a splendidly atmospheric historical story--a grand mix of adventure, romance, and a political dilemma. It's strewn with eccentric characters and a bit of comedy and it gives a good look at the gentry learning how the working class lives. Some of the train bits run a bit long, but overall an interesting story about the period between the world wars.
First posted on my blog My Reader's Block. Please request permission before reporting. Thanks.
September 11, 2017
This book is really about a) trains and b) communism and c) the 1926 general strike, but seems to take the position that because the fascist bourgeoisie and communist organizers may both at times use tactics of violence and false information (per the plot), they are both equally bad. The former are definitely shown to be very vile in this book, and the latter (also per this book!) not as bad - in fact (spoiler) the chief villain on the communist side is a man twisted by class aspirations.
Anyway sorry Peter Dickinson, the evils of capitalism and the evils of communism are not the same, thanks for playing. I appreciate the naive hope of an aspirational future where the wealthy graciously cede their gains and the poor are lifted up without too much chaos but it's unrealistic to the point of undercutting his usual astute observations and being a frustrating read.
Anyway sorry Peter Dickinson, the evils of capitalism and the evils of communism are not the same, thanks for playing. I appreciate the naive hope of an aspirational future where the wealthy graciously cede their gains and the poor are lifted up without too much chaos but it's unrealistic to the point of undercutting his usual astute observations and being a frustrating read.
Read
December 19, 2023Another of Dickinson's books where he manages to be noncommittal about his interesting characters and situations, leaving me feeling up in the air about what I just read--which is good, I think....For instance, I felt resentful about the perfect idyll of the gratuitous epilogue, which perhaps was intentional.
July 31, 2017
Peter Dickinson never disappoints. After a slow start, the story becomes a satisfying mix of intrigue, romance, social history, and psychological study. A quick read, but meaty.
February 27, 2021
3.5* I read it unusually slowly. I don't know why. I liked the characters and the plot. The time period (1921) was really interesting.
May 30, 2011
I had originally thought this belonged in the category "Literature and Fiction" but it turns out it does conform to the genre "Mystery" in many ways. This is not really a bad thing, but it does lead to the biggest let-down about the book.
The protagonist of this story, Tom Hankey, is unusually intelligent and perceptive; over the course of the book, his understanding is called on at both personal and societal levels. Mystery stories have a problem-solving focus; unlike in technothrillers or science fiction, they are social problems. There's a stereotype, left over from the early years of the genre, that detection hinges on untangling train schedules and alibis; but in more recent books, and certainly in any that I'd actually find interesting, it's really about reading people -- deciphering their motivations, their relationships, patterns of influence.
In A Summer in the Twenties, it was really a pleasure watching this process of understanding; plus, Tom's insistence on thoroughly considering the moral implications of his (and other people's) actions was refreshing. But, when you introduce a subject as large as the labor policy and revolutionary ideas that are discussed here, it's a shame to give them too superficial treatment. One thing about mysteries is that problems have to have solutions in order for the conventions of the genre to be fully met (many more recent examples are darker and more ambiguous, though). I've gotten beyond feeling satisfied by a denouement in which a villain is stymied in a single confrontation. Even when the problems involved are confined to a single family, I don't feel like they can be satisfactorily wrapped up very speedily. The biggest weakness of this otherwise good book is that it fits convention all too well in this respect.
The protagonist of this story, Tom Hankey, is unusually intelligent and perceptive; over the course of the book, his understanding is called on at both personal and societal levels. Mystery stories have a problem-solving focus; unlike in technothrillers or science fiction, they are social problems. There's a stereotype, left over from the early years of the genre, that detection hinges on untangling train schedules and alibis; but in more recent books, and certainly in any that I'd actually find interesting, it's really about reading people -- deciphering their motivations, their relationships, patterns of influence.
In A Summer in the Twenties, it was really a pleasure watching this process of understanding; plus, Tom's insistence on thoroughly considering the moral implications of his (and other people's) actions was refreshing. But, when you introduce a subject as large as the labor policy and revolutionary ideas that are discussed here, it's a shame to give them too superficial treatment. One thing about mysteries is that problems have to have solutions in order for the conventions of the genre to be fully met (many more recent examples are darker and more ambiguous, though). I've gotten beyond feeling satisfied by a denouement in which a villain is stymied in a single confrontation. Even when the problems involved are confined to a single family, I don't feel like they can be satisfactorily wrapped up very speedily. The biggest weakness of this otherwise good book is that it fits convention all too well in this respect.
February 23, 2014
I read this book years ago and really liked it.
This time through still un-put-downable though not quite so likable.
I liked it because it took off from a really interesting plotline: decent upper class hero gets involved with both fascist aristocrat thugs and dockside radical politics in the 20's. The almost equally involving romantic interest is a triangle with the hero, his equally upper class lover, and a fiery (almost literally) radical leader.
The aristocratic side is well done, to the point, almost, of a little Evelyn Waughish satire. The working class side is almost as good - could have done with more of this - and that heroine, the radical, is probably the most attractive character in the book: more of her, please.
But both the political narrative and the romance get rushed to unsatisfying conclusions: the villain gets exposed, the hero chooses one of the girls (sorry for the word!) and that's pretty much that.
This time through still un-put-downable though not quite so likable.
I liked it because it took off from a really interesting plotline: decent upper class hero gets involved with both fascist aristocrat thugs and dockside radical politics in the 20's. The almost equally involving romantic interest is a triangle with the hero, his equally upper class lover, and a fiery (almost literally) radical leader.
The aristocratic side is well done, to the point, almost, of a little Evelyn Waughish satire. The working class side is almost as good - could have done with more of this - and that heroine, the radical, is probably the most attractive character in the book: more of her, please.
But both the political narrative and the romance get rushed to unsatisfying conclusions: the villain gets exposed, the hero chooses one of the girls (sorry for the word!) and that's pretty much that.
May 8, 2010
I liked this reasonably well; a sympathetic main character, an interesting tie-in to history (labour unrest in 1920s Britain, the way that conservatives supported the rise of fascism, etc), and a good romance. But I keep finding Dickinson's work very predictable, which surprises me for books which are subtitled "a novel of suspense." I haven't read much in the genre, but I expected the tension which makes it suspenseful to come from not having any idea what would happen next, whose side people were on, etc etc. I'm not sure if these are just oddities in the genre, or if my expectations are wrong.
February 28, 2008
Interesting; a conservative view of Bolshevik strikes in England.
March 3, 2019
didn't like this book, not sure why but never finished it.
September 30, 2024
I love this time period but I couldn't get into this book. The characters didn't engage me.
September 18, 2016
What a great period piece. A small bit of history that is mostly forgotten by today's citizens.
March 26, 2017
Set in 1926, which was the year of the General Strike in England, Tom, a lord's son, is just graduating from Oxford. During the strike, his father asks him to drive a train, i.e. strike-break. Through this exercise, he meets some workers and starts to learn how the "other half" lives. There are a few too-long descriptions of train driving and fighting for my taste, but it's an interesting story of an interesting time (post WWI).
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews